The Esoteric Significance of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra
Section Seven The Seventh Inquiry into the Mind — All Without Attachment Is Called the Mind
Original text: 阿难白佛言。世尊。我昔见佛。与大目连。须菩提富楼那舍利弗。四大弟子。共转法轮。常言觉知。分别心性。既不在内。亦不在外。不在中间。俱无所在。一切无著。名之为心。则我无著。名为心不。
Explanation: Ānanda said to the Buddha, "World-Honored One, in the past I saw that when You discussed the Buddha-dharma together with Your four great disciples — Mahāmaudgalyāyana, foremost in supernatural powers, Subhūti, foremost in understanding emptiness, Pūrṇa, foremost in expounding the Dharma, and Śāriputra, foremost in wisdom — the World-Honored One often said that the nature of the mind that is aware and discriminates is neither within, nor without, nor in the middle; it is nowhere at all, attached to no dharma whatsoever, and that is why it is called the mind. Then that which does not attach, of mine — that is my mind, is it not?"
When the Buddha turned the wheel of the Dharma for His śrāvaka disciples, He taught the Small Vehicle dharma; at that time the World-Honored One could only speak of the deluded mind that is aware — the six consciousnesses — and in the Small Vehicle He absolutely did not specifically discuss the awareness-nature of the eighth consciousness. Ānanda was recalling the words the World-Honored One had spoken, saying that the nature of the mind able to be aware of and discriminate the six sense objects and the myriad dharmas is neither within nor without, nor in the middle; "within" means inside the body, "without" means outside the body; there is no middle; it is not situated at any location, not attached to any dharma — this is called the mind. What Ānanda narrated first was the Buddha's original words, and what came after was his own understanding of their meaning; the Buddha's original words were unproblematic, but his own understanding was mistaken.
Ānanda asked the Buddha: "Then that which is without attachment of mine — is it called the mind?" Since there is no attachment to anything, and the consciousness-mind cannot be found in any dharma, since the consciousness-mind is not attached to any single dharma — then is this consciousness-mind that is not attached to any dharma my consciousness-mind? Ānanda was like someone guessing at a riddle: if this one was wrong, he would guess that one; if that one would not do, he would propose yet another — always guessing. Ānanda finally said that what attaches to nothing is his mind; whether this statement was right or wrong he himself dared not affirm, so he asked the Buddha. The Buddha answered very patiently as well. Why was the Buddha so patient? Because the World-Honored One was about to expound the true reality of all dharmas, was about to expound the Great Buddha's Crown Śūraṅgama Sūtra, in order to benefit immeasurable sentient beings; the Buddha therefore explained to Ānanda patiently and meticulously — in truth, the Buddha was speaking for all sentient beings of later generations.
Original text: 佛告阿难。汝言觉知。分别心性。俱无在者。世间虚空。水陆飞行。诸所物象。名为一切。汝不著者。为在为无。无则同于。龟毛兔角。
Explanation: The Buddha told Ānanda: the nature of the mind you speak of as aware and discriminating does not exist in any dharma; yet the empty space of the world is one dharma among all dharmas; the animals and plants that move through water, land, and air, all objects and celestial bodies — each of these dharmas is one dharma among all dharmas; all the object-appearances you see — form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and dharmas, heavenly palaces, people and figures, the beings of the six realms, all the stars, all the dharmas of the receptacle world of the universe — are each one dharma among all dharmas, and you can discriminate every one of them. Is this non-attaching mind of yours existent or non-existent? If your mind does not exist, it would be like a tortoise's hair or a hare's horns.
Original text: 云何不著。有不著者。不可名无。无相则无。非无则相。相有则在。云何无著。是故应知。一切无著。名觉知心。无有是处。
Explanation: What is meant by "not attaching"? If you have a mind that does not attach, there is still a mind; it cannot be said that your mind does not exist — to say there is no mind would be wrong. Only if your mind had not the slightest appearance could one say there truly is no mind; yet your deluded nature of mind that is aware and discriminates still has an appearance, so one cannot say you lack an aware, discriminating nature of mind, for it can still be aware of and discriminate these six sense objects and myriad dharmas. If your aware, discriminating nature of mind exists, then the aware mind has a mode of activity (ākāra) as it operates; there exists the appearance of discriminating awareness; if there exists an appearance of awareness, that shows your mind still exists; and since your mind exists, how can it be said to attach to no dharma whatsoever?
If your mind truly attached to no dharma, then you could not be aware of any dharma, nor discriminate any dharma; yet your mind can indeed be aware of all dharmas and discriminate all dharmas. When I lead you to a heavenly palace, you can still see the heavenly palace; when I lead you to the hells, you can still see the hells; all the animals and plants on water, land, and in flight — all the object-appearances you can still see, still be aware of, still discriminate — that shows your aware mind has an appearance. Since it has an appearance, it exists; how can you say your aware mind attaches to no dharma at all? Therefore your claim that only what attaches to no dharma is your aware mind is incorrect.
Original text: 若汝执吝。分别觉观。所了知性。必为心者。此心即应。离诸一切。色香味触。诸尘事业。别有全性。
Explanation: If you cling to the mind that can discriminate form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and dharmas, the mind that can feel the six sense objects, the mind that can observe the six sense objects, as necessarily being your true mind, then this mind should, apart from all these states of form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and dharmas, still possess its own complete intrinsic nature; it would not exist with the existence of the six sense objects, nor cease with their cessation. This mind should be a self-existent mind, a mind that has been there from the very beginning; it cannot be a mind that appears only because the six sense objects are present. But that mind of discriminating with initial application and sustained examination (vitarka-vicāra) no longer exists once apart from the six sense objects, and so it is not your true mind.
This was the seventh point in the inquiry into the mind, and the World-Honored One refuted it yet again. Ānanda had nothing to say in reply, and acknowledged that the seven places where he claimed the mind was located were all wrong; the aware, discriminating nature of mind is not in any of these seven places — so where exactly is it? At this point Ānanda was thoroughly perplexed, and thus what is recounted in the text that follows becomes very important. The preceding seven inquiries into the mind all inquired into the mind that Ānanda took to be able to think, able to reason, able to love and delight in the Buddha; he took this mind to be real and then sought out where it was located, but in the end the Buddha refuted them all, saying that the mind is indeed not in the three places of within, without, and the middle, nor in the seven places Ānanda proposed; therefore such a mind is not the true mind, but a deluded mind that arises and ceases, false and illusory, born of causes and conditions. Then where exactly is the true mind? Please see what the Śūraṅgama Sūtra goes on to recount.
In the seven inquiries into the mind, not one located where the six-consciousness mind resides, showing that the six consciousnesses have no abode: they come from nowhere and go nowhere, illusory transformations, false and unreal, arisen in dependence on others (paratantra), without self-nature. Although one may now hold such a correct understanding, it is still not actual realization. To actually realize it, one must, within profound meditative concentration, employ the manas to ponder and investigate carefully; when the reasoning and lines of thought have become clear, the evidence conclusive, and all doubts severed, so that both the mind consciousness and the manas harbor no doubt whatsoever — that is actual realization.
